alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   JUN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                     MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                            78,531,000
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     15,527,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                       2,849,000
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 104,714,000
<PP&E>                                           105,382,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (41,229,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   289,364,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             45,233,000
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                         269,953,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       (46,307,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     289,364,000
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 201,223,000
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   (183,485,000)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (21,688,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 4,492,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      542,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (3,454,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (3,006,000)
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (5,918,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (0.16)




</TABLE>
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2278

To reauthorize the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program

Act of 1994.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 23, 2000

Mrs. LINCOLN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To reauthorize the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and

Design Program Act of 1994.

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF JUNIOR DUCK STAMP

4 CONSERVATION AND DESIGN PROGRAM ACT

5 OF 1994.

6 Section 5 of the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation

7 and Design Program Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 719c) is

8 amended by striking ‘‘for each of the fiscal years 1995

9 through 2000’’ and inserting ‘‘for each of fiscal years

10 2001 through 2005’’.
2

•S 2278 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF PROGRAM TO INSULAR AREAS.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Junior Duck Stamp Con3 servation and Design Program Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C.

4 719 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing:

6 ‘‘SEC. 6. DEFINITION OF STATE.

7 ‘‘In this Act, the term ‘State’ means a State, the Dis8 trict of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the

9 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Amer10 ican Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and any other ter11 ritory or possession of the United States.’’.

12 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 2(c) of the

13 Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program

14 Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 719(c)) is amended by striking

15 ‘‘50 States’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘States’’.

Æ
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

YI MA,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 20

- 72120

Agency No. A088

- 271

- 175

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 17, 2023 * *
Pasadena, California

Before: TASHIMA, HURWITZ, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Yi Ma petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(“BIA”) dismiss ing his appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying

adjustment of status

. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review “any judgment ” regarding the denial of an

* 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

FEB 22 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 application for adjustment of status

, 8 U.S.C. § § 1252(a )(2)(B)(i)

, 1255(j) , except to

the extent a petition for review poses “constitutional claims or questions of law

, ” i d.

§ 1252(a)(2)(D)

.

Although Ma contends that the IJ violated his constitutional due process rights

by effectively ma king a frivolousness finding without complying with certain

procedural requirements

, see Fernandes v. Holder , 619 F.3d 1069, 1076 (9th Cir.

2010) , the IJ made no such finding. Instead, she weighed the equities of Ma’s case

and found that they did not warrant a favorable exercise of discretion because of

Ma’s connection to a fraud scheme

. Ma’s real argument is that this weighing of the

equities was an abuse of discretion

, but w e lack jurisdiction to review that claim.

Torres

- Aguilar v. INS , 246 F.3d 1267, 127 1 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[P]etitioner may not

create the jurisdiction that Congress chose to remove simply by cloaking an abuse

of discretion argument in constitutional garb.” ); Bazua

- Cota v. Gonzales , 466 F.3d

747, 748

– 49 (9th Cir. 2006) (per curiam). To the extent Ma challenges the IJ’s

factual finding that he was connected to the fraud scheme, we likewise ha ve no

jurisdiction. See Patel v. Garland , 142 S. Ct. 1614, 1623

– 24, 1627 (2022).

PETITION DISMISSED

.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #12132 and #12133]

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 2.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Minnesota (FEMA-1900-DR), dated 04/19/2010.

*Incident:*                         Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         03/01/2010 through 04/26/2010.                    

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         05/19/2010.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/18/2010.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         01/19/2011.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Minnesota, dated 04/19/2010, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 03/01/2010 and continuing through 04/26/2010.

*All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.*

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) 

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2010-12586 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                                     FORM OF
                                LETTER AGREEMENT


                                                     March __, 1999


Sunrise Assisted Living, Inc.
9401 Lee Highway, Suite 300
Fairfax, VA  22031

Ladies and Gentlemen:

            Reference hereby is made to the Agreement of Merger dated as of
October 18, 1998 (the "Agreement") among Sunrise Assisted Living, Inc., a
Delaware corporation ("Acquiror"), Buckeye Merger Corporation, an Ohio
corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Acquiror ("Merger Sub") and
Karrington Health, Inc., an Ohio corporation (the "Company"), as amended by
Amendment No 1. to Agreement of Merger dated as of March 4, 1999, a copy of
which is attached to this Letter Agreement ("Amendment No. 1"). Capitalized
terms used in this Letter Agreement without definition shall have the meanings
assigned to them in the Agreement, as amended.

            In connection with the execution and delivery of the Agreement, the
undersigned shareholder of the Company executed and delivered the following:

            - that certain Shareholder Agreement dated as of October 18, 1998 
              between Acquiror and the undersigned ("Shareholder Agreement"); 
              and

            - a Company Affiliate Agreement, as contemplated in Section 5.12 of
              the Agreement.

            Having carefully read the attached copy of Amendment No. 1 and
having had an opportunity to discuss Amendment No. 1 with counsel for the
undersigned or counsel for the Company, the undersigned hereby:

            (i)  confirms to, and agrees with, Acquiror that the term "Merger
Agreement," as used in the Shareholder Agreement and the Company Affiliate
Agreement, shall be deemed for all purposes to mean the Agreement as amended by
Amendment No. 1; and

            (ii) reaffirms (a) all of the terms of the Shareholder Agreement, as
amended hereby, and (b) all of the representations, warranties and covenants to
Acquiror set forth in the Company Affiliate Agreement, as amended hereby.

            This Letter Agreement hereby amends the Shareholder Agreement and
the Company Affiliate Agreement and may be referred to as Amendment No. 1 to
Shareholder Agreement and Amendment No. 1 to Company Affiliate Agreement.


                                       1
<PAGE>   2


The validity and interpretation of this Letter Agreement shall be governed by,
and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Ohio, regardless of
the laws that might otherwise govern under applicable principles of conflicts of
laws thereof.

                                Very truly yours,


                                --------------------------------------------
                                By:




AGREED AND ACCEPTED 
  as of March __, 1999 by:

  SUNRISE ASSISTED LIVING, INC.


  -----------------------------------
  Name:
  Title:




                                       2
ACTION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE VIA ELECTRONIC BALLOT

SEPTEMBER 18, 2015

VOTED that the Executive Committee, on behalf of the Board of Regents pursuant to Board 

Bylaw 3.01, recognizes the generosity of David M. Rubenstein to the National Zoological Park 

and extends the naming of the David M. Rubenstein Family Giant Panda Habitat for an 

additional five years.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Morrison & Foerster LLP

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105

Exhibit A

Engagement Letter

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 1

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 2

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 3

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 4

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 5

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 6

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 7

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 8

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 9

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 10

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 11

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 12

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 13

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 14

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 15

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 16

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 17

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 18

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 19

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 20

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 21

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 22

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 23

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 24

 of 25
47750 

50386

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2194-3 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 17:42:12 Page 25

 of 25
II

Calendar No. 746

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2297

[Report No. 106–369]

To reauthorize the Water Resources Research Act of 1984.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 27, 2000

Mr. CRAPO (for himself, Mr. REID, Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. CONRAD, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. INHOFE, Mr.

VOINOVICH, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. ROBB, Mr. DASCHLE, and

Ms. LANDRIEU) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

AUGUST 25, 2000

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of July 26, 2000, by Mr.

SMITH of New Hampshire, without amendment

A BILL

To reauthorize the Water Resources Research Act of 1984.

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE WATER RE4 SOURCES RESEARCH ACT OF 1984.

5 Section 104 of the Water Resources Research Act of

6 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10303) is amended—
2

•S 2297 RS

1 (1) in subsection (f)(1), by striking ‘‘the Sec2 retary’’ and all that follows and inserting ‘‘the Sec3 retary $9,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, $10,000,000

4 for each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003, and

5 $12,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005,

6 to remain available until expended.’’; and

7 (2) in the first sentence of subsection (g)(1), by

8 striking ‘‘the Secretary of the Interior’’ and all that

9 follows through ‘‘2000’’ and inserting ‘‘the Secretary

10 $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, $4,000,000 for

11 each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003, and $6,000,000

12 for each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005, to be avail13 able’’.

Calendar No. 746

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2297

[Report No. 106–369]

A BILL

To reauthorize the Water Resources Research Act

of 1984.

AUGUST 25, 2000

Reported without amendment
NO. 07

- 17

- 00096

- CV

IN THE

SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS
AMARILLO, TEXAS

LAZARO WALCK Appellant,

V

CITY OF LUBBOCK Appellee.

On Appeal from the 72 nd District Court of Lubbock County, Texas, Lazaro Walck

v. City of Lubbock , Cause No. 2014

- 509,907

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

FOR FILING APPELLEE’S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW, CITY OF LUBBOCK, Appellee, and moves this Honorable

Court to grant a thirty (30) day extension of time to file Appellee’s Brief, and would

respectfully show as follows:

1. The City of Lubbock’s Brief is due to be filed with this Court on August

28, 2017. ACCEPTED

07-17-00096-CV

SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS

AMARILLO, TEXAS

8/14/2017 3:46 PM Vivian Long, Clerk2. City of Lubbock seeks a 30 day extension of time to file it’s Brief,

which would make the Brief due on September 28, 2017.

3. This req uested extension is requested as counsel for the City of

Lubbock is preparing briefs in other cases that are due on August 25, 2017 and

September 8, 2017

, in which there are unique issues of law that require extensive

briefing and research. As such, couns el does not believe that he will have sufficient

time before August 28, 2017, to properly prepare the brief on the issues that will be

presented in this appeal.

4. Counsel for the City has conferred with counsel for Lazaro Walck and

he does not oppose thi s extension.

5. This is the first extension of time that the City of Lubbock has sought

for the filing of its Brief, and this request for extension is not sought for delay, but

in order that justice might be done.

For these reasons, CITY OF LUBBOCK reque sts that this Court grant this

motion, and render an order extending the time for filing its Brief to September 28,

2017.

Respectfully submitted,

JEFF HARTSELL Assistant City Attorney

State Bar N o . 09170275

P O Box 2000
Lubbock, Texas 79457806

- 775

- 2222

Fax 806

- 775

- 3307

Email: jhartsell@mylubbock.us

/s/ Jeff Hartsell

JEFF HARTSELL

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the undersigned counsel for Appellee CITY OF
LUBBOCK, has conferred with counsel for Appellant, Phil Johnson, regarding this motion and he does not oppose this motion

.

/s/ Jeff Hartsell

JEFF HARTSELL

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 14 th day of August , 20 17, I electronically filed the foregoing document w ith the Seventh Court of Appeals using an e

- filing service provider. The electronic filing system sent a “Notification of Service” to the
following by electronic means.

Phil A. Johnson Jenkins, Wagnon & Young, P.C.

P O Box 420
Lubbock, Texas 79408 pjohnson@jwylaw.com

/S/ Jeff Hartsell

JEFF HARTSELL
----

**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**18        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 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/                JAMES A. HAYWARD    |   |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | James                A. Hayward        |   |
|   |   | Chief                Executive Officer |   |
|   |   | August                20, 2007         |   |
#### ALEXANDER C. MORRISON, Appellant, *v.*ANNA HORROCKS and Others, Respondents.

*Compulsory reference*— *cannot he ordered when an issue of fraud is raised.*

The plaintiff, having acquired the individual interest of one Thompson in the firm property of Thompson & I-Iorrocks, brought this action to set aside as fraudulent a sale of the firm property, made by the sheriff to the defendant Warhurst, .under executions issued upon judgments recovered against the firm, for a sum less than sufficient to pay the firm debts.

*429The complaint alleged that the price obtained upon the sale of the firm property to Warhurst was much less than its value, and was brought about by the fraudulent practices and representations of Warhurst, and that but for these the property would have realized enough to have resulted in a substantial advantage to the plaintiff, and prayed that the sale be declared void and an accounting be had.

*Held,*that the substantial issue in the action was fraud, and that a compulsory reference ought not to be ordered.

*Camp*v. *Ingersoll*(86 N. Y., 438) followed.-

Appeal from an order entered in Albany county, referring this action to a referee, for trial and determination.

*E. F. Bullard,*for the appellant.

*Doyle & Fitts*and *N. C. Moak,*for the respondents.

Landon, J.:

Plaintiffs assignor bought upon a sale had under an execution against George E. Thompson his individual interest in the firm property of Thompson *&*Horrocks, of which firm he was a member. Thereafter, upon a sale upon executions upon judgments against the firm, the firm property was sold to Warhurst for a sum less than sufficient to pay the firm debts. As a consequence, plaintiff’s assignor could take nothing under her previous purchase of George E. Thompson’s individual interest. The complaint charges that the price obtained upon the sale of the firm property to Warhurst was much less than the value of the property, and was brought about by the fraudulent practices and representations of Warhurst, and that bnt for these, the property would have realized enough to have' resulted in a substantial advantage to plaintiff’s assignor. The plaintiff asks to have the sale declared void, and that an accounting be made of the value of the property, adapted to the changes in its ownership since such purchase by Warhurst, which shall accomplish the same result as if the fraud had not been practiced.

Clearly the substantial issue is the fraud; the accounting is dependent upon the result of that issue, and will be wholly unnecessary unless the fraud be established. The accounting will be the means of measuring the sum total of the relief, if the right to it *430fib all be found to exist, but the difficult and substantial question is upon that right. Within the case of *Camp*v. *Ingersoll*(86 N. Y., 433) we think a compulsory reference ought not to have been directed.

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements.

Bocees, P. J., and Parker, J., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements' for -printing.