alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ERENDIRA RANGEL

- PALACIOS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, a public entity,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 17

- 56258

D.C. No. 3:16

- cv
- 00872

- AJB

- BLM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 13, 2018 **

Bef ore: LEAVY , M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Erendira Rangel

- Palacios appeals pro se from the district court’ s judgment dismissing her action alleging Title VII claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28

U. S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010) (dismissal based on Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 ( b )( 6 )); Jones v. Blanas , 393 F.3d 918,

* This disposition is no t 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 oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 23 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 56258

926 (9th Cir. 2004) (dismissal based on the applicable statute of limitations ). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul , 547 F.3d
1055, 1058

- 59 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Rangel

- Palacios’s Title VII claim concerning allegations in h er 2015 E qual Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) charge as barred by the applicable statute of limitations , and Rangel

Palacios failed to allege facts sufficient to show that equitable tolling applies

. See
42 U.S.C. § 2000e

- 5(e)(1) ( Title VII complainant must file EEOC charge no later

than 180 days, or authorized state or local agency charge no later than 300 days, after alleged unlawful practice occurred) ; Stoll v. Runyon , 165 F.3d 1238, 1242 (9th Cir. 1999) (explaining that equitable tolling is warranted “when extraordinary

cir cumstances beyond the plaintiff’ s control made it impossible to file a claim on time”)

. Dismissal of Rangel

- Palacios’s Title VII claim concerning allegation s in her

2013 EEOC charge was proper because Rangel

- Palacios failed to file this action within ninety days of receiving a right

- to

- sue letter. See Payan v. Aramark Mgmt.

Servs . Ltd. P’

ship , 495 F.3d 1119, 1121

- 22 (9th Cir. 2007) ( Title VII action must be commenced within ninety days of issuance of the right to sue letter).3 17

- 56258

We do not consider documents not presented to the district court

. See

United States v. Elias , 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“ Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

AFFIRMED.
Opinion issued September 2 8 , 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 21
- 00118
- CV

——————————— NATALIYA KROTOVA ALLEN , Appella nt

V. JOYCE ALLEN RIVES , Appell e e
On Appeal from the County Court Grimes County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 8916

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Natalia Krotova Allen, has filed a motion to dismiss her appeal because the parties have resolved their disputed issues. Appellee has not filed an opposition to the motion. The Court has not issued an opinion.2

Accordingly, the Court grants appellant’s motion and dismis ses the appeal.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1(a)(1); 43.2(f). Any other pending motions are dismissed as
moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Farris.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

SECTION 1350CERTIFICATIONS

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

                In connection withthe Annual Report of California Coastal Communities, Inc. (the  “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Sandra G. Sciutto, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to Rule 13(a)-14(b) or Rule 15(d)-14(b) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on my knowledge:

 

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

 

2.               The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby 18 U.S.C. 1350 has been provided to California Coastal Communities, Inc. andwill be retained by California Coastal Communities, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| Dated: April 28,  2005 | /s/ Sandra G. Sciutto   |   |
|------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                   | Sandra G. Sciutto       |
|                   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----

*In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), the abovecertification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to theliability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated byreference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent that theCompany explicitly incorporates it by reference in any such filing.

 

----
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Demond STEWARD, Defendant/Appellant.

No. ED 105267

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

FILED: March 13, 2018

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: Kristina Starke Olson, Public Defender, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT: Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Dora A. Fichter, Assistant Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.

Before Colleen Dolan, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Lisa S. Van Amburg, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Demond Steward ("Defendant") appeals from the judgment upon his convictions following a jury trial for one count of the lesser-included offense of murder in the second degree, in violation of Section 565.021, RSMo 20001 ; one count of endangering the welfare of a child, in violation of Section 568.045; and two counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015. The trial court sentenced Defendant to three terms of life imprisonment and one term of seven-years imprisonment, to be served concurrently. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

Unless otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to RSMo 2000 as amended.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                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 Historic Preservation Properties 1989
LP ("HPP'89") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 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 HPP'89.


/s/ Robert Gunn
------------------------------
Robert Gunn
Asset Manager
(Performing similar functions of Financial Officer)

Date: March 14, 2003
September 26, 2012

Attachment H

Worksheet Used to Calculate EPA and Federal Government Labor Costs

This attachment is available as part of the electronic docket EPA

- HQ

- OPP

- 2012

- 0544, Notice

of Supplemental Distribution of a Registered Pesticide Product , EPA ICR No. 0278.11, OMB

Control No. 2070

- 0044

, and is part of the ICR’s Supporting Statement

.



### NAICS: 999100

EPA or Federal Government

Labor Category: Formula Managerial Technical Clerical

Unloaded Hourly Rate 1 = W $55.67 $36.02 $20.38

Benefits Percentage 2 Lb = B/W 44% 44% 44%

Benefits per hour B = W*Lb $24.54 $15.88 $8.98

Loaded Hourly Rate Wb = W + B =

W(1+Lb) $80.21 $51.90 $29.36

Overhead Percentage 3 Lo = OH/Wb 50% 50% 50%

Overhead per hour OH = Wb*Lo $40.11 $25.95 $14.68

Fully Loaded Hourly

Rate Wf = Wb + OH

= W + B + OH $120.32 $77.85 $44.05

1. Data Source: BLS http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999100.htm May 2011 data

NAICS 999100

- Federal Executive Branch

Standard Occupational Codes:

Management: 11

- 0000, Management Occupations

Technical: 19

- 0000, Life, Physical, and Social Science

Occupations

Clerical: 43

- 0000, Office and Administrative Support

Occupations

2. Fringe benefits/wage per hour. The average for non farm, non federal civilian workers.

3. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, Sixth Edition

, EPA

- 452

- 02

- 001, Janu ary 2002, pg. 2

- 34. The loading for indirect costs is within the range of 20

- 70% of the load labor rate (wage + benefits) suggested in EPA guidance.