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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SANTIAGO VAZQUEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

MARTHA LEE WALTERS, Chief Justice of 

the Oregon Supreme Court; THOMAS A. 

BALMER; CHRISTOPHER L. GARRETT; 

ROGER J. DEHOOG, Justice of the Oregon 

Supreme Court; MEAGAN A. FLYNN; 

REBECCA DUNCAN; ADRIENNE 

NELSON, Associate Justices of the Oregon 

Supreme Court, each sued in their official 

capacities, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 21-35759 

D.C. No. 3:20-cv-01761-HZ 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 17, 2023**

Before: CLIFTON, R. NELSON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. 

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

FILED

APR 25 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 21-35759 

Santiago Vazquez appeals pro se from the district court’s summary 

judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an equal protection violation in 

connection with the temporary rules governing admission to the Oregon bar in 

2020. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Gordon 

v. County of Orange, 888 F.3d 1118, 1122 (9th Cir. 2018). We affirm. 

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Vazquez 

failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the classification 

scheme in question was not rationally related to a legitimate state interest. See 

United States v. Padilla-Diaz, 862 F.3d 856, 862 (9th Cir. 2017) (explaining 

rational bases review and recognizing that the challenger of a classification bears 

the burden of “negativing every conceivable basis which might support it” (citation 

omitted and alteration adopted)); see also Gallinger v. Becerra, 898 F.3d 1012, 

1018 (9th Cir. 2018) (explaining that “classifications that are to some extent both 

underinclusive and overinclusive” may be upheld under rational-basis review

(citation omitted)). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Vazquez’s motion 

for leave to file a supplemental complaint because Vazquez’s proposed complaint

failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible First Amendment retaliation 

claim. See Capp v. County of San Diego, 940 F.3d 1046, 1053-58 (9th Cir. 2019)

(setting forth elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim and explaining that 
 3 21-35759 

a plaintiff must plausibly allege that retaliation was the but-for motive for 

defendants’ actions); see also id. at 1055 (recognizing that an allegation is not 

plausible where there is an “obvious alternative explanation” for alleged 

misconduct (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 682 (2009)); Planned 

Parenthood of S. Ariz. v. Neely, 130 F.3d 400, 402 (9th Cir. 1997) (standard of 

review).

Defendants’ motion to substitute party (Docket Entry No. 26) is granted.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                                  CERTIFICATION

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Corporate Fraud Accountability Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted), Dr. Stephen A. Levine, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Allergy Research Group, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

         The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
March 31, 2003, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1 (the
"Periodic Report"), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of
this 15th day of May 2003.



                                            /s/ Stephen A. Levine
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Dr. Stephen A. Levine, Ph.D.
                                            CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
                                            FINANCIAL OFFICER
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Reliable Wool Stock LLC, Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, <br><br>against<br><br>117-119 Leasing Corp., Respondent-Tenant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Tenant appeals from (1) a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Erika M. Edwards, J.), entered September 29, 2016, which, upon an order granting landlord's cross motion for summary judgment, awarded landlord possession in a holdover summary proceeding and (2) an order (same court and Judge), dated December 12, 2016, which, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Final judgment (Erika M. Edwards, J.), entered September 29, 2016, and order (Erika M. Edwards, J.), dated December 12, 2016, reversed, with one bill of $30 costs, and landlord's cross motion for summary judgment denied.</p><p>This commercial holdover proceeding is not susceptible to summary disposition. The record before us, including the parties' respective expert affidavits, demonstrates the existence of triable issues as to whether tenant complied with the insurance coverage requirements of the governing lease.</p><p>We have considered tenants' remaining contentions for affirmative relief and find them unavailing.</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: July 17, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                               UNITED STATES CODE)

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) (the Act),
I, Mark M. Jacobs, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Orion
Power Holdings, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge:

     (a)  the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended
          December 31, 2003 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements
          of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange
          Act of 1934; and

     (b)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

Date: March 15, 2004                                      /s/ Mark M. Jacobs
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                          Mark M. Jacobs
                                                  Executive Vice President and
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 13.1

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of sanofi-aventis, a
French société anonyme (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the Form 20-F) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: February 28, 2011



By:

/s/ Christopher ViehbacherChristopher Viehbacher
Chief Executive Officer(1)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to sanofi-aventis and will be retained by
sanofi-aventis and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|(1) | Principal executive officer.
|--- | ----------------------------



1
EXHIBIT 99.1


                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
                          (Principal Financial Officer)
                         Pursuant to Section 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with this annual report on Form 10-K of Excalibur  Industries,  I,
Joseph P.  Hubert,  Chief  Executive  Officer  (Principal  Financial  Officer of
Excalibur   Industries,   Inc.,   certify,   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 this report fairly presents,  in all
              material  respects,   the  financial   condition  and  results  of
              operations of Excalibur Industries, Inc.


Date:  August 4, 2003                         /s/Joseph P. Hubert
                                              -----------------------
                                              Joseph P. Hubert
                                              Chairman of the Board, President
                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                              Principal Financial Officer
#### Cureton *vs.*Ketcherside *&*Brown, for use.

The verdict in this case was warranted by the evidence, and the presiding judge being satisfied therewith, this court will not interfere.

(a.) While this case approaches nearly to the point at which damages will be granted against the plaintiff in error, yet it does not clearly appear that it was brought to this court for delay only; and damages are therefore refused.

Judgment affirmed.

December 22, 1885.

Hall, Justice.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Willie James Walker, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Boklan, J.), rendered September 25, 1986, convicting him of attempted *645burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was not afforded the effective assistance of counsel is based on matters which are dehors the record, which matters are not reviewable on direct appeal *(see, People v Robinson,*122 AD2d 173; *People v Wolcott,*111 AD2d 943). The appropriate remedy is a postconviction motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 *(see, People v Brown,*45 NY2d 852; *People v Wolcott, supra,*at 943). Insofar as we are able to review his ineffective assistance claim, we find that defendant’s counsel’s performance amply met the standard of meaningful representation. Given the defendant’s status as a second violent felony offender, his counsel negotiated a favorable plea bargain, resulting in the imposition of the minimum allowable sentence *(see,*Penal Law § 70.04 [3] [c]; [4]; § 70.25 [2-a]).

The defendant’s purported misunderstanding of his potential exposure to incarceration for the offense of attempted burglary in the second degree is belied by the plea minutes. Since an objective reading of the plea bargain agreement was susceptible to but one interpretation, the defendant’s misunderstanding of or disappointment with the agreement does not suffice as a reason for vacating his guilty plea *(see, People v Cataldo,*39 NY2d 578; *People v Welch,*129 AD2d 752).

The defendant’s remaining contention that the imposed sentence was unduly harsh and excessive is devoid of merit *(see, People v Brown,*46 AD2d 255). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
- Home
- Media Center
- Press Releases

# USCP Investigating Cannon Building Evacuation

Press Release

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) continues to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the fire alarm that resulted in the evacuation of the Cannon House Office Building. 

At approximately 12:05 p.m. on Saturday, September 30, a fire alarm sounded inside the Cannon Building. USCP officers evacuated people from the building, floor by floor. The fire alarm only sounded in the Cannon Building, so that was the only building that was evacuated.

On security video, a man was seen trying to exit the door in the Cannon Building and then pulling the fire alarm that prompted the evacuation. USCP officers had previously placed signs with clear language that explained the door was secured and marked as an emergency exit only.

At approximately 1:30 p.m. the Fire Marshal determined there was not a fire and the building was safe. 

The USCP will continue to keep the public updated on the status of the investigation.

## Media Center

              - Press Releases
              - USCP Arrests
              - USCP FAST FACTS

## Yearly Archive

                  - 2024               (4)          
                  - 2023               (26)          
                  - 2022               (36)          
                  - 2021               (73)          
                  - 2020               (9)          
                  - 2019               (15)          
                  - 2018               (14)          
                  - 2017               (28)          
                  - 2016               (18)          
                  - 2015               (10)          
                  - 2014               (14)          
                  - 2013               (10)          
                  - 2012               (10)          
                  - 2011               (13)          
                  - 2010               (10)          
                  - 2009               (18)          
                  - 2008               (11)          
                  - 2007               (14)          
                  - 2006               (23)          
                  - 2005               (18)          
                  - 2004               (24)          
                  - 2003               (15)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

CEREMONIAL MISC. NO. 05-21

IN RE: THE MATTER OF THE RETIREMENT OF SHERRY M. TOBE-WILLIAMS

Before BARTLEY, Chief Judge, and PIETSCH, GREENBERG,

ALLEN, MEREDITH, TOTH, FALVEY, LAURER and JAQUITH, Judges, and

NEBEKER, KRAMER, HOLDAWAY, GREENE, KASOLD, 

HAGEL, MOORMAN, LANCE, DAVIS, and SCHOELEN, Senior Judges.

O R D E R

Before the Court is the matter of the retirement of Sherry M. Tobe-Williams, one of the longest 

serving employees of the Court. Ms. Tobe-Williams was hired on a temporary basis in 1992 as a data 

clerk to transfer information from paper docket sheets into QUILL, the Court's new computer system. 

Quickly proving herself, Ms. Tobe-Williams was soon offered a permanent position. She served in the 

Public Office for 15 years, first as an Appeals Processing Clerk and then as the Court's first Lead 

Processing Clerk. The case processing procedures she established and then enhanced during that time 

were instrumental in streamlining the work of the Public Office and many of her innovations remain in 

place to this day. 

In 2007, Ms. Tobe-Williams was again promoted and hired as Confidential Assistant to Judge Robert 

Davis. She served in that position until Judge Davis became Chief Judge, at which time she was promoted 

to Administrative Assistant to the Chief Judge. As Judge Davis prepared for retirement and Judge Joseph 

Falvey joined the Court, Ms. Tobe-Williams wore multiple hats for well over a year, working for both 

judges simultaneously. Since December 2019 she has served as Confidential Assistant to Judge Falvey. 

Ms. Tobe-Williams' admirable service began well before her arrival at the Court, and she retires with 

over 39-and-a-half years of federal service. At 15 years old she worked for the DC Government Summer 

Youth Employment Program and was honored, at that young age, for her service with an award for 

outstanding work performance. While in high school she continued her service as a Student Aide at the 

Department of Commerce, honing her office skills and learning to interact with working professionals. 

From 1982 to 1985 she served in the Internal Revenue Service Appeals Office as a Records Case Reviewer 

and then from 1985 until 1991 she worked as a Legal Technician at the Court of Military Appeals. 

Ms. Tobe-Williams is known across the Veterans Court as conscientious, efficient, and hard-working.

She is a problem solver and knows the Court's processes and the history of those processes more than 

almost anyone. She is sought out for her knowledge of internal Court operations as often as for her good 

humor and sage advice. Her loyalty, professionalism, reliability, and commitment to helping others will 

be deeply missed. 

Upon consideration of the foregoing, and as she departs to enjoy retirement, it is 

ORDERED that Sherry M. Tobe-Williams take with her our gratitude for the many years of 

outstanding service she has rendered to the Court, our admiration for her many accomplishments, the 

warmth of our continued friendship, and our very best wishes.

DATED: December 30, 2021 PER CURIAM.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

Recertification of Non-Attorney Practitioner by New Supervising Attorney

TO: Clerk of the Court

FROM: 

The undersigned, a member of the bar of this Court, hereby certifies that 

 , a non-attorney practitioner previously admitted to practice before the

Court, is now under my direct supervision. I understand that my direct supervision of the applicant

includes countersigning all submissions filed with the Court, being present at oral arguments, and

making sure that our representative at a Rule 33 conference possesses the authority to enter into a

joint resolution or settlement or is in immediate contact with a person having such authority.

DATE: SIGNATURE: 

ADDRESS: 

PHONE: ( ) 

Form 46D

(2/12)
Exhibit 15.3



LOGO

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-146265) and Forms F-3 (File
Nos. 333-114504 and 333-130632) of ViryaNet Ltd. pertaining of our report dated 15 July, 2011, with respect to the 2010 financial statements of ViryaNet (Pty) Ltd (a wholly-owned subsidiary of ViryaNet Ltd.), to be included in the Annual
Report (Form 20-F) of ViryaNet Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2012.



|                          
|--------------------------
|Nexia Melbourne           
|ABN 16 847 721 257        
|                          
|/s/ George S. Dakis       
|Partner                   
|Audit & Assurance Services
|                          
|Melbourne                 
|                          
|26 April, 2013            



LOGO
##### 



Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Embraer  Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A.:

We consent to the use in Registration Statement No. 333-14018 of Embraer 
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A. on Form F-3, as amended from time to
time, of our report dated June 18, 2003 on the consolidated financial
statements of Embraer  Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A. as of and for
the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph related to the change
in accounting for derivative financial instruments) appearing in the Annual
Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002, which is incorporated
by reference in such Registration Statement.

/s/ Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

São Paulo, Brazil
June 30, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 612 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 612

To amend section 1922A of title 38, United States Code, to increase the 
    amount of supplemental insurance available for totally disabled 
                               veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 21, 2009

  Mr. Jones introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend section 1922A of title 38, United States Code, to increase the 
    amount of supplemental insurance available for totally disabled 
                               veterans.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Disabled Veterans Insurance Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE FOR TOTALLY DISABLED VETERANS.

    Section 1922A(a) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``$20,000'' and inserting ``$40,000''.
                                 <all>
```