alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                              ALLSTAR SYSTEMS, INC.


Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 141, 222 and 242 of the Delaware  General
Corporation  Law  (the  "DGCL"),  Allstar  Systems,  Inc.,  a  corporation  duly
organized and existing under the DGCL (the  "Corporation"),  does hereby certify
that:

I.   The Board of Directors of the Corporation  (the "Board"),  by the unanimous
     written consent of its members filed with the minutes of the Board, adopted
     a  resolution  proposing  and  declaring  advisable  an  amendment  to  the
     Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation (the "Amendment").

II.  Thereafter,  the  Amendment  set  forth  below  was  duly  adopted  by  the
     stockholders  of the Corporation in accordance with Section 242 of the DGCL
     at an annual meeting of stockholders.

III. Article I of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation is deleted
     and replaced in its entirety as follows:

                                   "ARTICLE 1
                                      Name

     The name of the corporation is I-Sector Corporation (the "Corporation")."

IV.  That this  Certificate of Amendment  shall be effective on July 12, 2000 at
     9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time.

     In Witness Whereof Allstar Systems,  Inc. has caused this certificate to be
executed by Donald R. Chadwick, its authorized officer, on this 10th day of July
2000.

                                            ALLSTAR SYSTEMS, INC.


                                            By:  //Donald R. Chadwick
                                                 Donald R. Chadwick
                                                 Secretary
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5398 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain mixtures containing [3-[(6-chloro3-pridinyl)methyl]-2-thiazolidinylidene]cyanamide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 12, 2008 

Mr. HULSHOF introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain mixtures containing [3-[(6-chloro-3-pridinyl)methyl]-2-thiazolidinylidene]cyanamide. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MIXTURES CONTAINING [3-[(6-CHLORO-3-PRI4 DINYL)METHYL]-2-THIAZOLIDINYL5 IDENE]CYANAMIDE. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) by striking heading 9902.10.35; and 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5398 IH

1 (2) by inserting in numerical sequence the fol2 lowing new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Mixtures of [3-[(6-chloro-3- 

pridinyl)methyl]-2-thiazolidinylidene]cyanamide 

(thiacloprid) (CAS No. 

111988–49–9) and application adjuvants (provided for 

in heading 3808.91.25) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 subsection (a) apply to articles entered, or withdrawn from 

5 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

6 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential.



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

______________________

DAVID M. SHIPP, Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

______________________

2014

- 3019

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
Board in No. SF0432070279 -C- 2.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

David M. Shipp moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and requests the case be held in abeyance.

Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

(1) The motion f or leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Case: 14-3019 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 01/08/2014SHIPP v. HHS 2

(2) The request to hold the c ase in abeyance is d enied. The petitioner ’ s brief (form enclosed) is due within 30 days.

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court

s 24 Case: 14-3019 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 01/08/2014
STATE v. SCOTT.

No. COA05-1144.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 18, 2006.

Certification Date May 8, 2006.

Appeal from the Buncombe (04CRS53048, 04CRS53049, 04CRS53050, 04CRS53051, 04CRS53052, 04CRS53053, 04CRS53054, 04CRS53055, 04CRS53056, 04CRS53057, 04CRS53058, 04CRS53059, 04CRS53060, 04CRS53061, 04CRS53062, 04CRS53063, 04CRS53064, 04CRS53065, 04CRS53066, 04CRS53067, 04CRS53068, 04CRS53069, 04CRS53070, 04CRS53071, 04CRS53072, 04CRS53073, 04CRS53074).

Case reported without published opinion. No error in part; remand for correction of clerical errors.
STATE v. YOUNG.

No. COA04-1669.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 2, 2006.

Certification Date May 22, 2006.

Appeal from Henderson (03CRS55979, 04CRS1).

Case without published opinion. No error.
SMITH v. PARMAEI.

No. 141P05-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2006.

Michael E. Ciochina, Asheville, for Christiane N. Smith.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th day of October 2005 by Defendant for "Petition for Plain Error Review Under N.C.G.S. 7A-31(A)(B)(1)(2)(3)(4)(C)(1)(2)(3)(D)":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of March 2006."
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1522

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. KENNETH P. BROOKS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION; LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED; LOCKHEED MARTIN UTILITY SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (8:00-cv-01088-BEL) Submitted: October 27, 2006 Decided: February 23, 2007 Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth P. Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Glenn V. Whitaker, VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR & PEASE, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* Brooks was represented by counsel in district court but is pursuing his appeal pro se. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Kenneth P. Brooks, a pro se litigant, appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his False Claims Act complaint. Lockheed Martin has moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that Brooks cannot pursue his action pro se. * We grant the motion in part and dismiss the qui tam claims. We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Brooks’ retaliation claim. A lay person may not bring a qui tam action under the False Claims Act. See United States ex rel. Lu v. Ou , 368 F.3d 773, 775-76 (7th Cir. 2004). Although a qui tam relator is entitled by statute to a share of the recovery if his action is successful, see 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d) (2000), the United States is the real party in interest, and the need for adequate legal representation on behalf of the United States counsels against permitting pro se suits. See United States ex rel. Milam v. Univ. of Tex. , 961 F.2d 46, 50 (4th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, we grant Lockheed Martin’s motion in part and dismiss Brooks’ qui tam claims. With regard to Brooks’ claim of retaliatory discharge under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h) (2000), such a claim may be brought pro se, because it is not a claim on behalf of the Government. However, our review of the record shows that this claim was- 3 - untimely filed. Thus, we affirm the dismissal of this claim for the reasons stated by the district court. United States ex rel. Brooks v. Lockheed Martin Corp. , No. 8:00-cv-01088-BEL (D. Md. Mar. 27, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART ; AFFIRMED IN PART
Exhibit 4.10      CONSENT OF JÉRÔME LAVOIE   Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended February 28, 2014 (the Annual Report) of Virginia Mines Inc. (the Company), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  I, Jérôme Lavoie, participated in the preparation of the following technical reports:  - Technical Report and Recommendations, Summer 2013 Exploration Program, Wabamisk Project, Quebec completed in March 2014; and  - Technical Report and Recommendations, Winter 2013 Drilling Program, Lac Pau Project, Québec completed in September 2013;  concerning mineralized material in the Anatacau-Wabamisk and Lac Pau properties for the Company (collectively the Reports). Portions of the Reports are summarized under headings Item III  Description of the Business  3.2.4 Geological Settings; 3.2.5 Exploration and Drilling; and 3.2.6 Mineralization as for the Anatacau-Wabamisk property and under headings Description of the Business  3.3.4 Geological Setting; 3.3.5 Exploration and Drilling; and 3.3.6 Mineralization for the Lac Pau property, in the Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended February 28, 2014 (included as Exhibit 1 of the Annual Report, which Exhibit is incorporated by reference herein).  I hereby consent to the inclusion of the foregoing written disclosure and to the references to such disclosure and to my name under the foregoing heading and to all other references to such disclosure and to my name included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report.   Very truly yours,


| |                                    |  | 
| | ---------------------------------- |  | 
| | /S/
Jérôme Lavoie                  |  | 
| | Name:
Jérôme Lavoie, M.Sc.A., Eng. |  | 

May 15, 2014
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5561 

To amend the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 to provide for a temporary 

increase in the maximum loan guaranty amount for housing loans guaranteed by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 10, 2008 

Mr. BUYER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 to provide 

for a temporary increase in the maximum loan guaranty 

amount for housing loans guaranteed by the Secretary 

of Veterans Affairs. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Mortgage 

5 Stimulus Clarification Act of 2008’’. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5561 IH

1 SEC. 2. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN MAXIMUM LOAN GUAR2 ANTY AMOUNT FOR HOUSING LOANS GUAR3 ANTEED BY SECRETARY OF VETERANS AF4 FAIRS. 

5 Section 201(a) of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 

6 (Public Law 110–185; 122 Stat. 613) is amended by add7 ing at the end the following new paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(3) VA GUARANTEED HOUSING LOANS.—Not9 withstanding subparagraph (C) of section 

10 3703(a)(1) of title 38, United States Code, for pur11 poses of any loan described in that section for which 

12 the mortgagee issues a loan commitment during the 

13 period beginning on February 13, 2008, and ending 

14 at the end of December 31, 2008, the term ‘max15 imum guaranty amount’ means the dollar amount 

16 that is equal to 25 percent of the amount deter17 mined under paragraph (2) of this subsection for a 

18 residence of the applicable size located in the area 

19 in which the residence for which the loan is made is 

20 located.’’. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5599 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 5, 2008 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building located at 4600 Silver 

Hill Road in Suitland, Maryland, as the ‘‘Thomas Jefferson Census Bureau Headquarters Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

HR 5599 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress finds that— 

3 (1) Thomas Jefferson, as Secretary of State in 

4 1790, supervised the first modern census in world 

5 history; 

6 (2) the 1790 census was the first national cen7 sus in the United States and the first periodic cen8 sus in the modern nation-state era; 

9 (3) Jefferson urged President Washington to 

10 veto the first apportionment bill presented by Con11 gress on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, 

12 and Jefferson’s own apportionment formula was 

13 adopted and used until 1840; 

14 (4) Jefferson’s mastery of numbers and statis15 tical analysis helped alert the Nation to the impor16 tance of accuracy in the numbers used to describe 

17 the society and pointed to methods that later im18 proved census taking; 

19 (5) Jefferson offered population corrections to 

20 the European diplomatic community to more accu21 rately convey the fast-growing United States popu22 lation, which had been undercounted in previous cen23 sus taking; 

24 (6) Jefferson believed in the importance of ter25 ritorial expansion and insisted on equal representaVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:36 Jun 06, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5599.RFS H5599

erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
3 

HR 5599 RFS 

1 tion for the territories that were to join the Union 

2 as States; 

3 (7) Jefferson supervised the first census in 

4 world history that gave to the people more than it 

5 took from them, being designed less to extract taxes 

6 or raise a militia than to apportion political power 

7 to the people of the United States according to their 

8 numbers; and 

9 (8) Jefferson’s role in establishing a republic 

10 based on principles of representation underscores the 

11 historical significance of the United States census 

12 and the way the Government views and governs 

13 itself today. 

14 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION. 

15 The Federal building located at 4600 Silver Hill 

16 Road in Suitland, Maryland, shall be known and des17 ignated as the ‘‘Thomas Jefferson Census Bureau Head18 quarters Building’’. 

19 SEC. 3. REFERENCES. 

20 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

21 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

22 building referred to in section 2 shall be deemed to be 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
4 

HR 5599 RFS 

1 a reference to the ‘‘Thomas Jefferson Census Bureau 

2 Headquarters Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 4, 2008. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
STATE v. PORTER.

No. COA04-1332.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 6, 2005.

Certification Date December 27, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# L_2021120DE.01001601.xml

| 8.4.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 120/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2021

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 120/16

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 231/2012 der Kommission vom 9. März 2012 mit Spezifikationen für die in den Anhängen II und III der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1333/2008 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates aufgeführten Lebensmittelzusatzstoffe

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 83 vom 22. März 2012
  )

Seite 204, Anhang, Eintrag für E 494 Sorbitanmonooleat Zeile 7 (Gehalt) Spalte 2:

Anstatt:

„mindestens 95 % eines Gemischs von Sorbit, Sorbitan und Isosorbidestern“

muss es heißen:

„mindestens 95 % eines Gemischs von Sorbit-, Sorbitan- und Isosorbidestern“.

---
NEBRASKA 

#40 #37 0.3% $949 #41 #37 #34 

$1.8 B SPENT IN 1.4% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. PER RESIDENT $0.9 B CONTRACT 16,637 NUMBER OF $0.9 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Supplies and 

Equipment: 11% Construction: 23%

Research and

Development: 6% Service: 61%

By Service 

Army

12%

Navy/Marines

4%

Air Force

79%

Other Defense

6%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Reserve: 11%

Acti

6%

ve Duty: 38%

Civilian: 25%

National 

Guard: 2

Allocations, By Service 

Army

35%

Navy/Marines

5%

Air Force

59%

Other Defense

1%

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions)

Gilbane $144.0 M

Perspecta $103.7 M

Northrop Grumman $85.4 M

METGreen Solutions Inc. $36.3 M

Client/Server Software Solutions Inc. $16.5 M

SAIC $15.6 M

Booz Allen Hamilton $14.9 M

National Strategic Research Institute $14.6 M

Afognak Native Corp. $14.2 M

The Garrett Group $13.9 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$0.9 $0.8

FY13 FY14 FY15

$0.7 $0.7 $0.7 $0.6 $0.6 $0.6

FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20

$938.4 MILLION 16,637

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

Reserve Total

Sarpy 6,217 2,617 79 663 9,576

Lancaster 33 506 2,060 204 2,803

Douglas 82 908 334 529 1,853

Saunders 0 31 620 0 651

Hall 16 36 246 0 298

Adams 0 21 186 31 238

Dodge ND ND 0 183 ND

Buffalo ND ND 112 41 ND

Platte 0 ND 122 40 ND

Madison ND 12 100 29 ND

72 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020
FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

(M=millions)

(M=millions) (M=millions)

NEBRASKA 

FISCAL YEAR 2020 

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions)

Sarpy

Douglas

Lancaster

Madison

Thurston

Saunders

Kearney

Adams

Cass

Dixon

(M = millions)

$700.2 M

$101.2 M

$24.4 M

$13.8 M

$12.4 M

$10.6 M

$9.0 M

$4.8 M 

$4.4 M 

$3.1 M

Sarpy

Douglas

Lancaster

Saunders

Hall

Adams

Buffalo

Dodge

Cedar

Platte

$680.4 M

$101.1 M

$100.3 M

$15.1 M

$9.4 M

$5.0 M

$4.5 M

$4.3 M 

$3.9 M

$3.0 M

Thurston

Douglas

Sarpy

Lancaster

Adams

Saunders

Cass

Dixon

Madison

Kearney

Lancaster

Adams

Douglas

Sarpy

Saunders

Lancaster

Adams

Cedar

Platte Dodge

Buffalo Hall

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020 73

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5354 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain theatrical lighting fixtures. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 12, 2008 

Mr. ACKERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain theatrical 

lighting fixtures. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN THEATRICAL LIGHTING FIXTURES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Theatrical lighting fixtures of 

plastic; and on/off, automatic 

rotating, LED, light directing 

LED, and motion activated 

spotlights of plastic (provided 

for in subheading 

9405.40.80) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5354 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R 47.5, the court ha s determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Nos. 97-31039 & 97-31309

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex relator, Michael Sampson, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, and

LOUIS R. KOERNER, JR., Movant-Appellant

versus

CRESCENT CITY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE, INC. doing business as MEDIC ONE; MEDIC ONE AMBULANCE SERVICES, INC.; AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE, INC.; JERRY VARANAY; SUE BIROU; BONNIE EDWARDS, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-3505-A

September 18, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, AND DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

This is round three in attorney Louis R. Ko erner, Jr.’s

crusade to win a qui tam action arising out of the same set of

fac ts. Koerner lost the first two rounds. S ee Federal Recovery

Services, Inc. v. United States [Koerner I]

, 72 F.3d 447 (5th Cir.2

1995); United States v. Crescent City E.M.S.
, No. 96-3112 6, slip

op. at 1-2 (5th Cir. Aug. 19, 1997) (unp ublished opinion). The

complaint in this round is virtually identical to that dismissed in

rounds one and two. The district court accordingly dismissed the

round three complaint and imposed sanctions. S ee United States v.

Crescent City E.M.S. , No. 96-CV-3505-A (E.D. La. Sept. 12, 1997).

The district court’s reasoning is sound. We therefore AFFIRM the

district court’s dismissal of Sampson’s and Koerner’s claims, as

well as the court’s award of sanctions.

This appeal is simila rly frivolous and it is therefore

DISMISSED. S ee 5th Circuit R. 42 .2. At the end of the previous

round, we cautioned Koerner that “any future frivolous appe als

file d by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of

sanctions.” Koerner II
, slip op. at 2. We meant what we said. We

now impose sanctions of double costs and attorney’s fees incurred

in defending this appeal on Koerner. See Coghlan v. Starkey , 852

F.2d 806, 812-13 (5th Cir. 1988).

DISMISSED and REMANDED FOR DETERMINATION OF COSTS AND

ATTORNEYS’ FEES.
SILVERS v. MASTERCRAFT FABRICS, L.L.C.

No. COA05-895.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed June 6, 2006

Certification Date June 26, 2006

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. #204944)

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ABRAHAM SALGADO-SALGADO, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-73730 

Agency No. A200-381-221 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 12, 2018**

Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. 

Abraham Salgado-Salgado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

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

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying cancellation of removal. We 

dismiss 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

JUN 18 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-73730 

We lack jurisdiction to consider Salgado-Salgado’s unexhausted sole 

contention. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 

2004). Salgado-Salgado contends that the IJ’s failure to allow him to submit 

updated hardship evidence prior to issuing the removal order constituted a due 

process violation and a violation of 8 U.S.C § 1229a(b)(4)(B); however, SalgadoSalgado failed to adequately raise this contention in his brief to the BIA. See Young 

v. Holder, 697 F.3d 976, 982 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc), abrogated in part on other 

grounds by Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S.Ct. 1678 (2013) (“Presenting an argument 

to the BIA requires reasoning sufficient to put the BIA on notice that it was called 

on to decide the issue. A general challenge to the IJ’s decision is insufficient; the 

alien must specify particular issues on appeal to the BIA.” (citation omitted)). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.