alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BARHAM v. HAWK, et al.

No. 461PA04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 13, 2005.

Kathleen K. Lucchesi, S. Frederick Winiker, III, Charlotte, John D, Kocher, Patricia Wilson Magee, for Hawk & Ear, Nose & Throat.

Robert O. Jenkins, Raleigh, E. Hardy Lewis, for Gloria Barham.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th day of October 2005 by Defendant to Permit Filing of Supplemental Argument:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 13th day of October 2005."
Exhibit 10(ccc)

AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
TO
SUPERIOR TELECOM INC.
STOCK COMPENSATION PLAN
FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
(AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE AS OF JULY 1, 2001)

WHEREAS,Superior TeleCom Inc. (the "Company") maintains the Superior TeleCom Inc. Stock Compensation Plan for
Non-Employee Directors (Amended and Restated Effective as of July 1, 2001) (the "Plan");

WHEREAS,pursuant to Article X of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company (the "Board") may at any time, and from time to time,
amend, in whole or in part, any or all of the provisions of the Plan; and

WHEREAS,the Board desires to amend the Plan, effective as of January 1, 2003.

NOW, THEREFORE,pursuant to Article X of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of January 1, 2003, as follows:

1.    Section
5.1(a) of the Plan is amended by adding the following language at the end thereof to read as follows:



---



QuickLinks
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FERNANDO ENRIQUE RECINOS, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-71812 

Agency No. A040-427-185 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 18, 2019**

Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Fernando Enrique Recinos, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions pro se 

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his 

appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen. Our 

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part 

the petition for review.

* 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

SEP 26 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-71812 

Recinos does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the BIA’s 

denial of his motion to reopen. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 

1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening 

brief are waived). 

We lack jurisdiction to consider Recinos’s unexhausted ineffective 

assistance of counsel claim, which must first be raised in a motion to reopen before 

the BIA. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (“We lack 

jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative 

proceedings before the BIA.”); Liu v. Waters, 55 F.3d 421, 424 (9th Cir. 1995) (“A 

petitioner must make a motion for the BIA to reopen before we will hold that he 

has exhausted his [ineffective assistance of counsel] claims.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
# L_2017111EN.01001001.xml

| 28.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 111/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 111/10

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2017/743

of 25 April 2017

appointing a member, proposed by the Republic of Austria, of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Austrian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Erwin PRÖLL, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Erwin PRÖLL,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Mag. Johanna MIKL-LEITNER, Mitglied der niederösterreichischen Landesregierung. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mag. Johanna MIKL-LEITNER, Mitglied der niederösterreichischen Landesregierung.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 25 April 2017.

For the Council

The President

I. BORG

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

---
VIRGINIA 

#2 

ΨςϬ͘ϯ^WEd/E

ηϭ

ϭϬ͘ςйK&^dd

ϭϬ͘εй

OF TOTAL U.S. 

Ψϳ͕Ϭςς

PER RESIDENT 

#3 

Ψκϭ͘ςKEdZd

#2 

Ϯκε͕ϬϭκEhDZ

ηϭ

ΨϭΘ͘ϳWZ^KEE>

STATE GDP DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING OF PERSONNEL SPENDING 

 DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

ŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͗ ϭй ZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚĂŶĚ

ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͗ ϭϬй ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƐĂŶĚ

ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ͗ ϯϬй

^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ͗ ρεй

By Service 

Army 

19% 

Navy/Marines 

40% 

Air Force 

14% 

Other Defense 

27% 

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

ůůŽĐĂƟŽŶƐ͕LJdLJƉĞ

Reserve͗ϳй

National Guard: 3% 

Active Duty: 50% Civilian: 40% 

ůůŽĐĂƟŽŶƐ͕By Service 

Army 

23% 

Navy/Marines 

58% 

Air Force 

9% 

Other Defense 

10% 

Top Defense Contractors 

,ƵŶƟŶŐƚŽŶ/ŶŐĂůůƐ

'ĞŶĞƌĂůLJŶĂŵŝĐƐ

EŽƌƚŚƌŽƉ'ƌƵŵŵĂŶ

ŽŽnjůůĞŶ,ĂŵŝůƚŽŶ

/

>ĞŝĚŽƐ

ƚůĂŶƟĐŝǀŝŶŐ^ƵƉƉůLJ

WĞƌƐƉĞĐƚĂ

>ŽĐŬŚĞĞĚDĂƌƟŶ

^/

;DсŵŝůůŝŽŶƐ͕сďŝůůŝŽŶƐͿ

Ψϯ͘ς

Ψϭ͘Θ

Ψϭ͘Θ

Ψϭ͘ϳ

Ψϭ͘κ

Ψϭ͘ϯ

Ψϭ͘Ϭ

ΨΘΘκ͘ϳD

ΨϳϳΘ͘ϳD

Ψςκκ͘ςD

Contract Awards Performed ;LJ&ŝƐĐĂůzĞĂƌ͕ďŝůůŝŽŶƐͿ

Ψκϭ͘ς

Ψϯϳ͘ϭ Ψϯϳ͘ϯ

&zϭϮ

Ψϯκ͘Ϯ Ψϯκ͘ρ Ψϯκ͘ϳ

&zϭϯ &zϭκ

ΨϯϮ͘Ϭ ΨϮε͘Ϯ

&zϭρ &zϭς &zϭϳ &zϭΘ &zϭε

ΨϭΘ͘ϳ/>>/KE Ϯκε͕Ϭϭκ

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

dŽƉĞĨĞŶƐĞWĞƌƐŽŶŶĞů>ŽĐĂƟŽŶƐ

ŽƵŶƚLJͬŝƚLJ ĐƚŝǀĞ ŝǀŝůŝĂŶ EĂƟŽŶĂů ZĞƐĞƌǀĞ dŽƚĂů

ƵƚLJ 'ƵĂƌĚ

EŽƌĨŽůŬŝƚLJ ϭς͕ϳεΘ ϭς͕ςϭς ϮεϮ ϭ͕ϮϳϬ ϯκ͕εϳς

sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂĞĂĐŚŝƚLJ ϭϳ͕ρκρ ϯ͕ΘϮϯ ΘϮϳ κ͕ϳϮϯ Ϯς͕εϭΘ

&ĂŝƌĨĂdž ς͕εϮΘ ϭϮ͕ϯϳκ ςϮϬ Ϯ͕εϭϮ ϮϮ͕Θϯκ

ƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ Ϯ͕ΘϮε ϭς͕Ϯρϳ ϳϭ ϭκε ϭε͕ϯϬς

WŽƌƚƐŵŽƵƚŚŝƚLJ ϯ͕εϮϭ ϭκ͕Ϭςϳ ϭϮϳ ϮϮ ϭΘ͕ϭϯϳ

WƌŝŶĐĞtŝůůŝĂŵ Θ͕Ϭερ κ͕ϯϳϯ ϮΘϭ ϳκκ ϭϯ͕κεϯ

WƌŝŶĐĞ'ĞŽƌŐĞ Θ͕ϯϳΘ ϯ͕κεϯ Ϭ κϬϭ ϭϮ͕ϮϳϮ

zŽƌŬ Θ͕ϯεκ ςϳρ ϭ͕ϬϭϬ εϳϮ ϭϭ͕Ϭρϭ

EĞǁƉŽƌƚEĞǁƐŝƚLJ ρ͕ϳϮϮ ϯ͕ςρϬ ςρ ϭ͕ϯεκ ϭϬ͕Θϯϭ

ĐĐŽŵĂĐŬ ς͕Θρς Θϯ ϭϬΘ ςϳΘ ϳ͕ϳϮρ

ϭϭϬ KĨĨŝĐĞŽĨ>ŽĐĂůĞĨĞŶƐĞŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶͶĞĨĞŶƐĞ^ƉĞŶĚŝŶŐďLJ^ƚĂƚĞ͕&zϮϬϭε
FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018 I S CVIRGINIA AL YEAR 2 0 1 8

FISCAL YEAR 2019 

ĐĐŽŵĂĐŬ

zŽƌŬ

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

>ŽƵĚŽƵŶ

&ĂŝƌĨĂdž

WƌŝŶĐĞtŝůůŝĂŵ

ƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ

ůĞdžĂŶĚƌŝĂŝƚLJ

EĞǁƉŽƌƚEĞǁƐŝƚLJ

EŽƌĨŽůŬŝƚLJ

sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂĞĂĐŚŝƚLJ

WŽƌƚƐŵŽƵƚŚŝƚLJ

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (DсŵŝůůŝŽŶƐ͕сďŝůůŝŽŶƐͿ

&ĂŝƌĨĂdž

EĞǁƉŽƌƚEĞǁƐŝƚLJ

ƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ

EŽƌĨŽůŬŝƚLJ

sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂĞĂĐŚŝƚLJ

WƌŝŶĐĞtŝůůŝĂŵ

>ŽƵĚŽƵŶ

ůĞdžĂŶĚƌŝĂŝƚLJ

WŽƌƚƐŵŽƵƚŚŝƚLJ

ŚĞƐĂƉĞĂŬĞŝƚLJ

;DсŵŝůůŝŽŶƐ͕сďŝůůŝŽŶƐͿ

Ψϭϳ͘κ

Ψϯ͘ε

Ψϯ͘Θ

ΨϮ͘ε

ΨϮ͘ϭ

ΨϮ͘Ϭ

Ψϭ͘ϳ

Ψϭ͘κ

ΨϳϮϳ͘ϬD

ΨρΘκ͘ρD

EŽƌĨŽůŬŝƚLJ

&ĂŝƌĨĂdž

ƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ

sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂĞĂĐŚŝƚLJ

WŽƌƚƐŵŽƵƚŚŝƚLJ

ĐĐŽŵĂĐŬ

WƌŝŶĐĞtŝůůŝĂŵ

EĞǁƉŽƌƚEĞǁƐŝƚLJ

zŽƌŬ

WƌŝŶĐĞ'ĞŽƌŐĞ

$2.7 B 

$2.2 B 

ΨϮ͘ϭ

Ψϭ͘ϳ

Ψϭ͘ϯ

ΨεΘϮ͘ϭD

ΨΘϯϬ͘ϭD

ΨςΘϮ͘ϮD

Ψςκρ͘κD

ΨςκϮ͘κD

&ĐƚŝǀĞ &'ƵĂƌĚ &ZĞƐĞƌǀĞ ƌŵLJĐƚŝǀĞ ƌŵLJ'ƵĂƌĚ ƌŵLJZĞƐĞƌǀĞ DĐƚŝǀĞ EĂǀLJĐƚŝǀĞ t,^

ŚĞƐĂƉĞĂŬĞŝƚLJ

&ĂŝƌĨĂdž

WƌŝŶĐĞtŝůůŝĂŵ

ƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ

EŽƌĨŽůŬŝƚLJ

sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂĞĂĐŚŝƚLJ

WƌŝŶĐĞ'ĞŽƌŐĞ

EĞǁƉŽƌƚEĞǁƐŝƚLJ

WŽƌƚƐŵŽƵƚŚŝƚLJ

KĨĨŝĐĞŽĨ >ŽĐĂůĞĨĞŶƐĞŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶͶĞĨĞŶƐĞ^ƉĞŶĚŝŶŐďLJ^ƚĂƚĞ͕&zϮϬϭε ϭϭϭ
EXHIBIT 99.1

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS GARTNER GROUP, INC.:

     We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated October
31, 1997, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Gartner Group, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of September 30, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for the
years then ended, which report appears in the September 30, 1997 Form 10-K
Gartner Group, Inc., in the December 31, 1997 Form 10-K of Cognizant
Corporation.

                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Stamford, Connecticut
March 18, 1998

                                     99.1-1
EXHIBIT 12.1


                    FrontierVision Operating Partners, L.P.
               Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (Dollars in thousands)


                                                                 For the Period
                                                                 From Inception
                                          For the Year Ended (April 17, 1995) to
                                          December 31, 1996   December 31, 1996

                                                     --------          --------
Net Loss                                             (23,801)            (2,703)
Add (Deduct):
     Income Tax Provision (Benefit)                     --
Less: Minority Interest
                                                    --------           --------
Pre Tax Income (Loss)                                (23,801)            (2,703)
Add:  Fixed Charges
     Interest                                         22,898              2,488
     Amortization of debt offering
        expenses                                         999                 69
                                                    --------           --------
     Total fixed charges                              23,897              2,557
                                                    --------           --------
                                                    $     96           $   (146)
                                                    --------           --------
Fixed Charges                                       $ 23,897           $  2,557
                                                    ========           ========

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed
     Charges                                             N/A                N/A

Deficiency of Earnings to Fixed
     Charges                                        $ 23,801           $  2,703
                                                    ========           ========
Exhibit 32.2

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 B&G Foods, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 2, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert C. Cantwell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(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.

|/s/ROBERT C. CANTWELLRobert C. Cantwell
Chief Financial Officer
April 28, 2005 |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 

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

---
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906



 EXHIBIT 32.2


 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

 PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periods ended
September 30, 2004 (the "Report") of APOLLO INVESTMENT CORPORATION (the
"Registrant"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, RICHARD L. PETEKA, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the
Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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


                                           /s/    Richard L. Peteka
                                         ---------------------------------
                                         Name: Richard L. Peteka
                                         Date: November 8, 2004
!"#$%%&' '()##'*% )*%&'+,,$('),-.'($/01)!* '02 3+-14.5).) '6



		77		7



7			


7789::;	7	
<


		


	
=

	
	

	
	7

;>		77		;	
		
	?

=

	
7	@	
	



77;7777	
	89::;8	7		


	

7;	
		


<		

;		7




		

	7	;



AABC?CDCAEBB>DFCB



 B		G?
	89::;HI
JIKJ

7	
	

			
			?
77		
	IJ	7

	
7	7


;	
			
	


7	
?					

7		7		;

F7			?7
		LM8:N

7	
		



				;O		

7		

	
?7				=7		
	



 	
		GB
77		@?

		;		
	
		

	;O=
7			

7			

	@	
	?7		
777		


7	

	
7	;F7
	E	HP
7

	
77	
;QRRSRTUTSHVOW8V9:;8:PI
J;&'+-12 

		7;



 ?
7GX
			<	
7

	
		
	?=

	

<	;	?
	


<	

			7	
7	;77	

			

77	<;		

7	
	
			7		
?

<	

;



 	F7W	IFWJG?		


	7	

		;	7		
	FW	7	


					


7;77	

	
			7	;		
	@
	

	7
<FW	;


 	












	










 
!
"

!
!



#

#

!!



 $
#

#!
%!
&'(()

#




#

#!
*+%,&-&)"

.%,

!
!!


!#


 !
!

  !/!
!


0!


#
#

!
	



!







 !"


#


 
 !


!!#
"

.%,
!





!/#

#!
#







 

#

#!
	






/
%!,



!







!

! 
12345467898:;4<=;268>=*+%,

&-&)?@
!

 ##





A64<2B<CD4C4D84EFG	



!
/

!
	


64H=D<82B<D2;2=DI4J:D<8B;4I8EE464BK4C4344B;4D4H<D<BI<6I2EA64<2B<CD4C4D84EG<BI

A=C<B8<DD894D8;22IFG



 L!
+
!	
M

#N
!
O!*+%,!
&-&)?P@



!
!

#

#!


.%,

A=C<B8<DD894D8;22IGE8BI8BHF"Q

!!


P

K2B62DD4I8B548H<82B7E2DD234IC>;43;8D4CD2346K2RR4B7<B45<D=<82B2E<I4S=<K>



N,
!

	







!




,T
U!
#
!



!!
7<D;2=H;;4D<3:=6:248E26<H4BK>K;84E2<=R4


FV;48B46:64<82B2E;8D4H<D:625882BQ!!
	

!



!#


.%,
!


!



#

W!
+






!




!
U

#
.%,U!!
	

!


#

#

#;4I4K882BP!
!!!
!
	





!
L!
+
!



 +
.%,
!
!

	
.%,

#
!


!!


T
!
X!Y!
.%,!

!


W!

.%, 

X%N
!
Z
#




$


#

!


# 
!!	





!
.%,
!

!






!!!
#

#!
"
!



/






!
!!



!

+

!
 !!
O

!!









#
#

#!

!

!
!
!
#

#!
!
	



	
	
	





	






	
	
		

	 		


	


 	
		
	
	!
 
	

"	
	
	



		
		 				


"
		
	 	
!

#$%&'&$(&)(*$+&,'*-$%'./.$&0)'&%1)*23.(..4&'*3&-536*$5$7&)358*35.$!9"	
	



	: 
				
	





 ;
	!<


		 	

	
	




	
	



	 
	
=>?0)

	 
	
	 
	

 	
	
:	
	


!<

	




:		
	



	
	

 




	




 	
	
	

	
	
	


	36&5))1&)5,&$35%5&,+@>4&(5*2?.1$)&20)'&%&''*22&33&'!





ABBC<CDAEADFGC



 :		
	HIJJ!KLM
	
	
	
	


:	



	 
	!<

	:
!	
		
:
"	:

	:


	
		

	
	<	N 		


	
"	 
"


	
	
	
!



 A 
<

	

	
		

	 
	


 	A 
!E 






O:
"

 
	

:	
 
:
:	


	
 
"	

:
	


!D 	
A 
	:
P
		
	




 
	



	
	!<

		KQ
	


	:


 
	:	
	 	R
:!



FABBC<C



<


	


	:
:	 
		
	

		
"
	
S		 	


			
"
	AS

	

	



					
!	

	
:		A!			
  	


	
 	
	 
	"
 
 :

	
		




		
:
	

		
	


		 
		:
!



B
	 

	
:O	 
		S	
A
	


	
	





:


:		 


	
		

	
!D	
T	



	
"	
A


:	;
 		
   
 

 	
	

	
	

	

"
S


	

	!<
:
	
 	


		

	

	!

		
	

	
S;:

	





	
	


 

 		
	

!
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 131 (Monday, July 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 41189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14642]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Tax Forms and 
Publications Project Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Tax Forms and 
Publications Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy 
Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on 
improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. This 
meeting will be held via teleconference.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, August 9, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Smith at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 
317-3087.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Tax Forms and 
Publications Project Committee will be held Tuesday, August 9, 2022, at 
1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or 
submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and 
structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be 
made with Fred Smith. For more information, please contact Fred Smith 
at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 317-3087, or write TAP Office, 1111 
Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at 
the website: http://www.improveirs.org.

    Dated: July 5, 2022.
Kevin Brown,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2022-14642 Filed 7-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Ludovicus N. KEYZER, a/k/a Ludo Keyzer, Joseph Kintz, Robin Kintz, Carl W. Parker, III, and Barry Nakell v. AMERLINK, LTD., Richard Spoor, Deborah N. Meyer, John Meuser, Meyer & Meuser, P.A., American Detective Services, Inc., and Kenneth J. Johnson.

No. 587A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 1, 2005.

Barry Nakell, for Ludovicus N. Keyzer, et al.

Richard T. Boyette, Alycia S. Levy, Kari R. Johnson, Raleigh, for Deborah N. Meyer, et al.

Steven C. Lawrence, Fayetteville, for Amerlink & Spoor.

Patrick D. Sarsfield, II, Charlotte, for American Detective Ser., et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Plaintiffs on the 19th day of October 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st day of December 2005."

Plaintiffs shall forthwith submit an appeal bond to this Court, as provided by Appellate Rule 17(b). The bond may be in cash or by a written undertaking with good and sufficient surety in the sum of $250.00.

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Plaintiffs new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more that 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA STROKE REHABILITATION ASSOCIATES, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. NAUTILUS, INC., a Washington corporation, DBA The Nautilus Group, Inc., Defendant - Appellee. No. 12-56824D.C. No. 3:09-cv-00744-CABMDD

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted February 10, 2014 Pasadena, California Before: FARRIS, N.R. SMITH, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. 1. The district court properly granted judgment as a matter of law against Southern California Stroke Rehabilitation A ssociates, Inc. (SCSRA). Notice to the 

# FILED

FEB 18 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.Page 2 of 3 seller of an alleged breach of warrant y is a required element under California Commercial Code § 2607(3)(A), and notice must occur pre-suit. See Alvarez v. Chevron Corp. , 656 F.3d 925, 932 (9th Cir. 2011). While notice need not be formal, the purpose of the statutory requirement is to give the defendant an “opportunity [to repair] the defective ite m, reduc[e] damages, avoid[] defective products in the future, and negotiat[e] settlements.” Pollard v. Saxe & Yolles Dev. Co. , 525 P.2d 88, 92 (Cal. 1974). No reasonable jury could conclude that SCSRA’s May 2008 letter provided Nautilu s with the requisite notice of an impending breach-of-warranty claim, even as to the weight trees mentioned in the letter. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a). As to the rest of the equipment at issue here, SCSRA claimed it was unaware of the de fects underlying the present action until after the Direct Focus litigation concluded. Assuming that to be true, SCSRA’s May 2008 letter, sent during the Direct Focus litigation, could not have notified Nautilus of defects that SCSRA itself had not yet discovered. The district court did not err in rejecting SCSRA’s novel “futility” and equitable estoppel excuses. No Califor nia court has recognized such excuses to § 2607(3)(A)’s notice requirement, and given the absence of a prejudice requirement, it’s unlikely a California court would do so. See Cardinal Health 301, Inc. v. Tyco Elecs. Corp. , 87 Cal. Rptr. 3d 5, 22 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008).Page 3 of 3 2. The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint. In addition to SCSRA’s undue delay in seeking leave to amend, allowing amendment would have prejudi ced Nautilus by requiring another round of summary judgment motions and materia lly altering the scope of the litigation. The district court didn’t clearly err in finding that SCSRA’s new assertions were inconsistent with its original claims, and that SCSRA knew or should have known the relevant facts at least three y ears prior to seeking leave to amend. Under these circumstances, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend. See AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc. , 465 F.3d 946, 951–54 (9th Cir. 2006). AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.2
                            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 Annual report on Form 10K of ATEL Cash  Distribution Fund
VII, LP, (the  "Partnership")  for the period  ended  December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
and  pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, I, Paritosh K. Choksi,  Chief Financial  Officer of
ATEL Financial Services, LLC, general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify
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 Partnership.

Date:        3/26/2004



/s/ Paritosh K. Choksi
------------------------
Paritosh K. Choksi
Executive Vice President of General
Partner, Principal financial officer of registrant